I don’t want standard parts. I want smaller parts where possible. I want it to fold up as small as possible. That’s why I got a folding bike.

Standard parts are designed with no thought to folding up a bike, or space saving. That’s why you end up with the rear derailleur dragging on the ground. And a fold that is many inches wider in all directions.

I want brilliant award winning design. I want the parts to be custom designed and integrated into the system, instead of hanging full sized touring bike parts on it.

Thanks for the info. Those translate into 24.2"x14.3"x26.6", to be compared with my Brompton's 23"x12"x23". MIT is then too wide to fit into the B&W case and it may be hard to find a case that will accommodate + it will be impossible to find a case accommodating it and meeting the airline linear dimension limit of 62". The B&W case sits just at the limit and Brompton fits very tightly ito that case, particularly with the width. MIT will further not normally fit the X-ray channel that, in my measurements, requires the bike to stay under about 23".

Incidentally, my Dahon fits into the B&W case but you have to work hard to decompose it. The beauty of Brompton is that you just drop it into the case and walk towards the door. Bike Friday fits fine into my standard Carlton suitcase, but again you need to work hard to decompose it which is a drag.

I donít want standard parts. I want smaller parts where possible. I want it to fold up as small as possible. Thatís why I got a folding bike.

Standard parts are designed with no thought to folding up a bike, or space saving. Thatís why you end up with the rear derailleur dragging on the ground. And a fold that is many inches wider in all directions.

I want brilliant award winning design. I want the parts to be custom designed and integrated into the system, instead of hanging full sized touring bike parts on it.

This is what makes Bromtpon so attractive.

You don't worry about parts because they are all available online or phone. Furthermore, since the frame stays the same each year, you can rest assured there will be parts for your bike years down the road. I have two Dahon bikes and even though they are not bad, there is no way I can soure parts for the hinges.

However, if the folding bike is made by a company that comes out with a new model each year and doesn't stock parts, then it makes sense to use standard parts. A standard rear derailleur isn't too bad on a 20 inch wheel but it looks way too big on the MIT's 16 inch wheels.

Along those lines, in my round-the-world observations, the majority of folder owners never folds their bikes and presumably does not even know how to fold. With this it should not actually matter whether the folder folds.

Huh? That doesn't make sense.

How many people buy a folder to take on a plane vs just taking on mass tran or less space in their home? I'm sure most people aren't concerned about a folder fitting into a specific case. I've only ever seen one Brompton rider around this area with a front bag,and I've seen many pics of them without the front carrier block,so I don't think how it interfaces with a gen light is going to be a major concern for most people. I'm sure most of the folks who own folders want them to be light and easy to work on.

This is my last post on this as it does not seem to go anywhere. The US may be a market in terms of value of folders sold, but nonexistent in terms of popularity. In my area, I may encounter one folder in the street per 5 years. In most countries, people buy folders because they think they might fold them and various stores offer them likely because they occupy less floor space. In practice, most people use them as regular bikes, never fold them, but are happy that they occupy limited space, think mini-velo, while keeping them on their balcony or some shed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dynaryder

I'm sure most people aren't concerned about a folder fitting into a specific case.

You want to fit it into any case that an airline will accept. MIT's raw dimensions, as provided, blow the airline limit, so forget the planes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dynaryder

I've only ever seen one Brompton rider around this area with a front bag,and I've seen many pics of them without the front carrier block,so I don't think how it interfaces with a gen light is going to be a major concern for most people.

Most Brompton owners that I know of, when they want to carry load, use the front block. Most owners that put a permanent lamp on, put it in front of the crown. Brompton's fold protects the lamp there.

Anyway, more options on the market can be good and you can proceed as you wish. For me it is not worth paying nearly as much as for a Brompton while not getting a Brompton. In fact, I have no interest in an alu frame. When getting a Dahon, I looked for one out of steel. When I get a Brompton, I buy into an integrated, thought through system, and not just a bike that folds. Yes, I can make accessories, cases, parts and modify a bike, if I need to, myself. However, it all takes time and effort. When the manufacturer thinks and anticipates my needs I am happy and it saves me months and maybe years on projects, that I can spend on something else.

... I'd much rather save a couple pounds and be able to remove the rear wheel without tools.

I'd much rather own a bike that has stood the test of time and is still in business at the expense of carrying a wrench in the bike's frame to remove the rear wheel. A couple of pounds difference you say? Go visit the loo before a ride for an equal savings in weight if you think that's such a concern (something I find amusing coming from a Dyna rider ).

I'm sensing this thread is becoming an increasingly entrenched war between the haves and have-nots.

I did not start this thread to bash Bromptons. In fact, I plan to get one if the price and timing is right.

I am simply voicing a hope that a competitor will arise that will offer better folding functionality at more affordable prices. Many will try, many will fail. But ultimately, someone will succeed, and that will be good for everyone BUT Bromptons owners, because you will no longer enjoy the great resale value of used Bromptons. That will probably include me as well.

The Brompton is overpriced for what you get. Those of us who would like a small folder (like the Brompton) but won't pay the inflated price welcome the competition offered by the MIT bike line.

The reason that the capitalist, profit oriented company, Brompton, can get the inflated price is because their marketing department has successfully created a cultural mystique. Some Brompton owners jokingly describe the owners groups as a cult. It satisfies an emotional need of certain personality types. Hence its use by marketeers.

The Brompton is overpriced for what you get. Those of us who would like a small folder (like the Brompton) but won't pay the inflated price welcome the competition offered by the MIT bike line.

The reason that the capitalist, profit oriented company, Brompton, can get the inflated price is because their marketing department has successfully created a cultural mystique. Some Brompton owners jokingly describe the owners groups as a cult. It satisfies an emotional need of certain personality types. Hence its use by marketeers.

That may be so - it's certainly a cult of sorts, but which marketer wouldn't use such a tool to promote their brand? I understand companies need to maximise their profits because they'll never know when they may be blindsided by a better product.

Just look at Nokia and their unwillingness to innovate quickly enough. They were a BEHEMOTH of the mobile phone market for a decade, and now they're nothing. Just over a period of 5 years.

That said, I'm sure the majority don't subscribe to the "me too" mentality - they genuinely find the Brompton suits a need that other bikes are lacking - me included.

I'm not hating on Bromptons, but bemoaning the lack of viable competitors. Some of us don't see it yet, but all of us would benefit when someone creates a fold - or improves on theirs - that truly threatens the primary advantage of the Bromptons.

No wonder since the Brompton is so expensive. If a competitor comes out that's much cheaper and as good if not better than that's not going to feel too good to those who paid full whack. But the chance of a clone improving on the Brompton is minimal and you only have to look at the odd design solutions of the MIT V8: the weird protruding Ahead stem, reclining folded shape, inappropriate seat post set-back and protruding cables to see that unless a company is fully committed to folding bike design the end result is somewhat compromised.

Thanks for the info. Those translate into 24.2"x14.3"x26.6", to be compared with my Brompton's 23"x12"x23". MIT is then too wide to fit into the B&W case and it may be hard to find a case that will accommodate + it will be impossible to find a case accommodating it and meeting the airline linear dimension limit of 62". The B&W case sits just at the limit and Brompton fits very tightly ito that case, particularly with the width. MIT will further not normally fit the X-ray channel that, in my measurements, requires the bike to stay under about 23".

Incidentally, my Dahon fits into the B&W case but you have to work hard to decompose it. The beauty of Brompton is that you just drop it into the case and walk towards the door. Bike Friday fits fine into my standard Carlton suitcase, but again you need to work hard to decompose it which is a drag.

According the the website the Brompton width is 10.6, not 12.0 - my experience confirms the smaller dimension...

I'm sensing this thread is becoming an increasingly entrenched war between the haves and have-nots.

I did not start this thread to bash Bromptons. In fact, I plan to get one if the price and timing is right.

I am simply voicing a hope that a competitor will arise that will offer better folding functionality at more affordable prices. Many will try, many will fail. But ultimately, someone will succeed, and that will be good for everyone BUT Bromptons owners, because you will no longer enjoy the great resale value of used Bromptons. That will probably include me as well.

I think the issue here is that with the copied folding mechanism (and within the title of this thread, the term "Brompton clone") a comparison to the Brompton is invited. A more apt comparison would be to other folders in general.

It is so simple, obvious really, but for Brompton owners it is mainly about the quick compact fold. As noted previously, I calculated that the folded Brompton is 55% the size of the folded MIT. A folded Brompton is still pretty big actually - take a look at the maximum size of a standard checked airline bag. The MIT is almost twice the size. The MIT owner will not be slipping one or two of those under a table at a restaurant or next to his feet while on a barstool. The MIT owner will not be rolling his bike shopping cart style down the aisle of a grocery store. The MIT owner will be the guy with his bike taking up a large chunk of aisle space on a crowded bus or light rail car because it won't fit between the seats. He will be the guy putting his folder in the luggage car on the Amtrak because it won't fit in the alloted space in the passenger car. He will be the guy locking his bike outside the shop because to bring it inside would be ludicrous. I have never locked my Brompton outside a cafe, pub, grocery, shop etc.

If such a compact fold is not desired or needed, then there are cheaper options available. But this matter of the size of the fold is critical for many Brompton owners.

The Brompton is overpriced for what you get. Those of us who would like a small folder (like the Brompton) but won't pay the inflated price welcome the competition offered by the MIT bike line.

The reason that the capitalist, profit oriented company, Brompton, can get the inflated price is because their marketing department has successfully created a cultural mystique. Some Brompton owners jokingly describe the owners groups as a cult. It satisfies an emotional need of certain personality types. Hence its use by marketeers.

zebede, with his parting shot, has exposed himself as one who stereotypes and judges people without knowing a thing about them, and makes it clear that he feels superior to them. We all know who is the one who really looks bad in these situations. But I would like to respond to his point about the Brompton being overpriced.

Without question, the Brompton is more expensive than many other folding bicycles. Just like any other item in the market, buyers must decide whether the item is overpriced or worth what they pay. The demand for the bike, at the going price, is so great that dealers quickly sell as many as they can get and a three month waiting period is not uncommon. By my understanding of economics, this suggests that the Brompton is not overpriced. Personally I believe that it expensive but a good value. Whether or not this holds true in Singapore (or by purchasing through other channels) is for keyvan to decide.

Actually I think Zebede had made some good points. Whenever anyone makes even the smallest criticism of a Brompton on this forum, certain members set out fire down the poster of those comments. I say well done to Zebede for sticking to his guns and having the balls to provide a counter argument to all those that extol the virtues the Brompton. No other folding bike provokes this sort of reaction on this forum and to be honest its getting beyond a joke. At the end of the day we are all different and as such we have different requirements for our bikes. The Brompton wont suit everyone, those who are happy with their Brompton, good, I am happy for you but at least accept that is not suitable for us all.

A couple of other differences that may matter to some, but not to others:

The six speed brompton internally geared hub provides evenly spaced gears over a wider range than the MIT offers in its various configurations. I didn't see the specs for the 8 speed w/ derailuer so we can't get specific, but zebede pointed out that the MIT could be purchased with the Nexus 7 (incidentally this will cause it to weigh more than the Brompton but this is of little importance to most of us) if one values the advantages of an internally geared hub. The range of gearing on the Nexus 7 is 244% vs 302% on the Brompton. With the Brompton you could have a both a lower gear for climbing and a higher gear for cranking a top speed than with the MIT.

Consider what you are likely to transport and what it will weigh. With the MIT, your only choice seems to be to place it on the rack, over the rear wheel. Most cyclists prefer to more evenly distribute the weight, if possible. May Bromptons owners report that they prefer to have weight carried on the front for this reason.

Actually I think Zebede had made some good points. Whenever anyone makes even the smallest criticism of a Brompton on this forum, certain members set out fire down the poster of those comments. I say well done to Zebede for sticking to his guns and having the balls to provide a counter argument to all those that extol the virtues the Brompton. No other folding bike provokes this sort of reaction on this forum and to be honest its getting beyond a joke. At the end of the day we are all different and as such we have different requirements for our bikes. The Brompton wont suit everyone, those who are happy with their Brompton, good, I am happy for you but at least accept that is not suitable for us all.

Meaningful criticism is good, especially when balanced and supported by fact, although all are welcome to express opinions. Stereotyping people and insulting them as a class is not criticism and in my opinion, not "ballsy" and not a reason to respect a person.

While many Brompton owners seek to explain the advantages of the Brompton when the topic comes up, there are posters here who seem to have an obsession with trying to tear it down. I guess the give and take is part of the forums. Hopefully, in the end, the poster posing the question gets useful information.

I have never said that the Brompton is the bike for everyone and have repeatedly said that if you don't want/need the compact quick fold there are many other options, many of them cheaper. For me it is a unique tool. Enjoy your bikes - happy trails!

The Brompton is overpriced for what you get. Those of us who would like a small folder (like the Brompton) but won't pay the inflated price welcome the competition offered by the MIT bike line.

The reason that the capitalist, profit oriented company, Brompton, can get the inflated price is because their marketing department has successfully created a cultural mystique. Some Brompton owners jokingly describe the owners groups as a cult. It satisfies an emotional need of certain personality types. Hence its use by marketeers.

Wow. Is this what the folding bike forum has come to? zebede... I can understand your points: I'd like a less expensive version of a Brompton too, but what you just wrote ... really? I know from other threads you're pretty unimpressed with Bromptons, but seriously?

Overinflated price? Maybe so, but I'm not sure what other bike has come up with a better fold, and by that, I don't mean just copying somebody else's idea. I think the point is innovation, not just imitation. I have taken my Brompton on planes/trains/automobiles and yes, I fold it every time... and it's been great. Hey! That's why I bought it.

Cult? Marketing? Mystique? Sure. So what? If I like the notion that's being pitched to me, and it does me or others no harm, who cares? Emotional need? I cannot think of one person who is above desiring some association with a group/item/thing that does not fill some sort of need or perceived need: Apple, beats audio, fast cars, the latest self-help book, zumba, gluten free, [fill in your own descriptor or brand].

If you are above desiring to be a hipster or some other emerging category of 21st century social strata, more power to you! Me? I like the image Brompton (or other) presents - and seriously, don't you think all of us on this forum don't realize that owning any moderately or seriously expensive bike does not involve some sort of "statement" on our part?

Tights? Tweed? No, I don't own them either. No, I don't fall into the kool-aid crowd; in fact, I kind of defy logic among my peers in terms of falling nicely into categories.

zebede you've managed, ironically, to plaster all Brompton riders with the same brush. I'd love to have paid less for my Brompton; heck, I'd love to have a modified Brompton style bike that takes beefy 20" fat tires. But you know, the Brompton - for all its flaws and yes I do know it has them - does what it was intended to do really well.

keyvan's thread was quite legitimate. Bottom line: if you want it, you can afford it, and it fits your needs, buy it. If you can't, well, then don't - look for alternatives or be prepared for trade-offs.

Please stick to the issues - thanks (although I suspect you'll never read this since you've unsubscribed).

I used to frequent a photography gear forum, and there was a lot of bashing and pumping of different gear. Sometimes the threads would get childish and start to degrade because of a few who insisted on stating erroneous information as fact. But then things started getting better because some people started asking for proof with statements.

So here to, if someone says bike 'A' folds to XX -XX - XX dimensions and bike 'B' folds to YY -YY - YY dimensions, well then back it up with a link to prove it.

Is someone writes that a certain bike has low quality parts. Back it up. Provide links with solid proof.

etc, etc, etc...

After a while (at that other forum) silly statements started to get less. People would post more useful positive statements and provide links that helped everyone learn a thing of two. No one would post silly info, because they knew they would get a number of members asking for them to provide links with solid proof.

I had a Mezzo and a Brompton. I sold the Mezzo and kept the Brompton solely because of the fold. The Mezzo was a much better bike. But then,my Speed Pro TT is even better. So if I'm in need of a bike that can be folded,I have the SPTT,if I need something that folds tiny,I have the Brommie. Would really be nice to be able to combine them into one though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BassNotBass

(something I find amusing coming from a Dyna rider ).

Believe me,if I ever win the lottery,the Dyna's getting about a 100lbs diet.

Without question, the Brompton is more expensive than many other folding bicycles. Just like any other item in the market, buyers must decide whether the item is overpriced or worth what they pay. The demand for the bike, at the going price, is so great that dealers quickly sell as many as they can get and a three month waiting period is not uncommon. By my understanding of economics, this suggests that the Brompton is not overpriced. Personally I believe that it expensive but a good value. Whether or not this holds true in Singapore (or by purchasing through other channels) is for keyvan to decide.

If the Brompton is overpriced, what high quality folding bike would you consider cheap? When I look at what's available, every folder that has better parts than the Brompton is selling close to the same price if not more.

There's one more thing. You can buy a clone all you want but every time you pass someone riding a Brompton, you'll continue wishing for the real thing. Been there, done that.

The point is there's definitely room for improvement for a Brompton - the fold is amazing, but it's most definitely NOT a great all-round folder. There's certainly room for a competitor to offer one with a similar (or better) fold, better parts, better ride and for cheaper.

It happened with cars, mobile phones, electronics, etc and it will most certainly happen with eco-friendly transportation. It's a testament to the brilliance of the fold that competitors haven't quite found a better one. Yet it would be short-sighted and narrow-minded to think no one ever can or will.

As the folding market grows, this becomes more likely every day as companies and individuals divert funds and brainpower to this endeavor. MIT has the right idea and will serve as a learning tool for others. It's just a matter of time, and unfortunately, Bromptons might be caught with their pants down. They've been too comfortable for too long.

Wow. Is this what the folding bike forum has come to? zebede... I can understand your points: I'd like a less expensive version of a Brompton too, but what you just wrote ... really?

What people are upset is the fact that the Brompton is not full DuraAce for the price they charge. Therefore, shame on them for charging so much when the price should be reduced by 30% or more. However, Brompton is paying good wages at West London and prefers to stay that way. I value a company that wants to build in their country of origin instead of firing the staff and moving production to China to reduce costs or make an extra buck. Furthermore, I don't see anyone at the factory getting rich either and Mr. Andrew R. does not look like a billion bucks either.

So my next folder will probably be a Brompton. That's if I can somehow find a way to use up the current one before I turn 90! LOL.

>>>>We continue to design and build our bikes in West London because it is the only way to ensure the necessary quality on our hand-built bicycles. Moving production offshore in search of lower labour costs, business rates and taxes would certainly bring some obvious benefits, but these would be outweighed by the consequences of losing control over quality and, ultimately, losing the confidence of the consumer.<<<<